Presented by: Anthony Newman, Senior Publisher
Location/Date: IPCAT Meeting, San Diego Sept. 2015
How to Write Great Papers and Get Published
Understanding and benefiting from
the publishing process
2
Workshop Outline
How to get Published Scholarly publishing overview
What to publish
Select your journal/readers/audience carefully
Typical article structure
The review and editorial process and your response
Promoting your research
Behind the scenes in publishing
Publishing ethics
| 3
Peer-reviewed journal growth 1990-2013
| 4
Scholarly publishing today
Scientific, technical and medical (STM) publishing
2,000 STM publishers
1.4 million
peer-reviewed
articles
20,000
peer-reviewed
journals
5
Trends in publishing
5
Rapid conversion from “print” to “electronic”
1997: print only
2009: 55% e-only (mostly e-collections) 25% print only 20% print-plus-electronic
2014: 95+% e-only (in life sciences field over 99%)
2016: ???
Changing role of “journals” due to e-access
Increased usage of articles (more downloads)
at lower cost per article
Electronic submission
Increased manuscript inflow
Experimentation with new publishing models
E.g. “author pays” models, “delayed open access”, etc.
PDF versus HTML era currently
6
A strong manuscript is needed!
It has a novel, clear, useful, and exciting message
Is presented and constructed in a logical manner
Reviewers and editors can grasp the scientific significance easily
Editors and reviewers are all busy scientists –
make things easy to save their time
7
Find out what’s Hot (downloads)
8
Find out what is being cited and from where
9
Find out who is being cited
10
There are many tools available such as SCOPUS, WoS, Google Scholar, PubMed.
Use what you have available. Become skilled in using these effectively…..
Strategic Information gathering
11
Look at your references – these should help you narrow your choices.
Review recent publications in each “candidate journal”. Find out the hot topics, the accepted types of articles, etc.
Ask yourself the following questions:
Is the journal peer-reviewed to the right level?
Who is this journal’s audience? Multidisciplinary versus Niche
Level of exposure – high use platform e.g. ScienceDirect, or not.
How fast does it make a decision or publish your paper?
Do you want or need to publish Open Access?
What is the journal’s Impact Factor? Other Bibliometrics – SNIP etc?
Does it really exist or is it dubious? (check for example Beall’s List of Predatory Open Access Publishers) http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/
DO NOT gamble by submitting your manuscript to more than one journal at a time.
International ethics standards prohibit multiple/simultaneous submissions, and editors DO find out! (Trust us, they DO!)
Select the best journal for submission
12
Choose the right journal
Investigate all candidate journals to find out
Aims and scope
Accepted types of articles
Readership
Current hot topics go through the abstracts
of recent publications)
13
Impact Factor
[the average annual number of citations per article published]
For example, the 2013 impact factor for a journal is calculated as follows:
A = the number of times articles published in 2011 and 2012 were cited in indexed journals during 2013
B = the number of "citable items" (usually articles, reviews, proceedings or notes; not editorials and letters-to-the-Editor) published in 2011 and 2012
2013 impact factor = A/B
e.g. 600 citations = 2.000
150 + 150 articles
What is the Impact Factor (IF)?
14
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
Mathematics & Computer Sciences
Social Sciences
Materials Science & Engineering
Biological Sciences
Environmental Sciences
Earth Sciences
Chemistry & Chemical Engineering
Physics
Pharmacology & Toxicology
Clinical Medicine
Neuroscience
Fundamental Life Sciences
Mean Impact Factor
Influences on Impact Factors: Subject Area
15
16
| 16
Impact Factor
Bibliometric indicators and downloads
Eigenfactor SJR SNIP H-Index
17
| 17
Impact Factor
Bibliometric indicators BioSystems and friends
18
Alternative Metrics and BioSystems
h-index 2006-14 = 33
BioSystems:
A visible publishing platform:
170,000 downloads per year
9,500 institutes have access
4,244 institutes accessed the journal in the last 12
months
50 Year anniversary in 2017!
19
Your Journals list for this manuscript
Each submission is different – there is no one master
list of suitable journals!
So you now have a sequence list of candidate journals
for your manuscript?
All authors of the submission agree to this list
Write your draft as if you are going to submit to the
first on your list. Use its Guide to Authors
20
Stick to the Guide for Authors in your manuscript, even in the first draft (text layout, nomenclature, figures & tables, references etc.). In the end it will save you time, and also the editor’s.
Editors (and reviewers) do not like wasting time on poorly prepared manuscripts. It is a sign of disrespect.
20
Read the ‘Guide to Authors’- Again and again!
21
Why Is Language Important?
Save your editor and reviewers the trouble of guessing what you mean
Complaint from an editor:
“[This] paper fell well below my threshold. I refuse to spend time
trying to understand what the author is trying to say. Besides, I
really want to send a message that they can't submit garbage to us
and expect us to fix it.
My rule of thumb is that if there are more than 6 grammatical
errors in the abstract, then I don't waste my time carefully
reading the rest.”
22
Scientific Language – Overview
Key to successful scientific writing is to be alert for common errors:
Sentence construction
Incorrect tenses
Inaccurate grammar
Not using English
Check the Guide for Authors of the target journal for
language specifications
Write with clarity, objectivity, accuracy, and brevity.
23
Scientific Language – Sentences
Write direct and short sentences – more professional looking.
One idea or piece of information per sentence is sufficient.
Avoid multiple statements in one sentence – they are confusing to the reader.
24
Typical Structure of a Research Article
Title Abstract Keywords
Main text (IMRAD) Introduction Methods Results And Discussions
Conclusion Acknowledgement References Supplementary Data
Journal space is not unlimited.
Your reader’s time is scarce.
Make your article as concise as possible
- more difficult than you imagine!
Make them easy for indexing and
searching! (informative, attractive,
effective)
25
Methods Results Discussion
Conclusion
Figures/tables (your data)
Introduction
Title & Abstract
The process of writing – building the article
26
Title
A good title should contain the fewest possible words that adequately describe the contents of a paper.
Effective titles Identify the main issue of the paper
Begin with the subject of the paper
Are accurate, unambiguous, specific, and complete
Are as short as possible
Articles with short, catchy titles are often better cited
Do not contain rarely-used abbreviations
Attract readers - Remember: readers are the potential authors who will cite your article
26
27
Abstract
Tell readers what you did and the important findings
One paragraph (between 50-250 words) often, plus Highlight bullet points. Some journals have structured abstracts.
Advertisement for your article, and should encourage reading the entire paper
A clear abstract will strongly influence if your work is considered further
Graphite intercalation compounds (GICs) of composition CxN(SO2CF3)2 · δF
are prepared under ambient conditions in 48% hydrofluoric acid, using
K2MnF6 as an oxidizing reagent. The stage 2 GIC product structures are
determined using powder XRD and modeled by fitting one dimensional electron
density profiles.
A new digestion method followed by selective fluoride electrode elemental
analyses allows the determination of free fluoride within products, and the
compositional x and δ parameters are determined for reaction times from 0.25 to
500 h.
What are the
main findings
What has been
done
28
Introduction
The place to convince readers that you know why your work is relevant, also for them
Answer a series of questions:
What is the problem?
Are there any existing solutions?
Which one is the best?
What is its main limitation?
What do you hope to achieve?
28
General
Specific
29
Methods / Experimental
• Include all important details so that the reader can repeat the work. • Details that were previously published can be omitted but a
general summary of those experiments should be included
• Give vendor names (and addresses) of equipment etc. used
• All chemicals must be identified • Do not use proprietary, unidentifiable compounds without
description. State purity and/or supplier if it is important.
• Present proper control experiments • Avoid adding comments and discussion • Write in the past tense
• Most journals prefer the passive voice, some the active.
• Consider use of Supplementary Materials • Documents, spreadsheets, audio, video, .....
29
Reviewers will criticize incomplete or incorrect method descriptions, and may
even recommend rejection
30
Results – what have you found?
The following should be included
the main findings
Thus not all findings. Decide what to share.
Findings from experiments described in the Methods section
Highlight findings that differ from findings in previous publications, and unexpected findings
Results of the statistical analysis
30
31
"One Picture is Worth a
Thousand Words"
Sue Hanauer (1968)
Results – Figures and tables
Illustrations are critical, because:
Figures and tables are the most efficient way to present results
Results are the driving force of the publication
Captions and legends must be detailed enough to make figures and tables self-explanatory
Figures and tables should not need further explanation or description in text. Less writing and less reading. Let your figures do the work instead of words.
32
Discussion – what do your results mean?
It is the most important section of your article. Here you get the chance to SELL your data! Many manuscripts are rejected because the Discussion is weak
Check for the following:
Do your results relate to the original question or objectives outlined in the Introduction section?
Do you provide interpretation for each of your results presented? Are your results consistent with what other investigators have
reported? Or are there any differences? Why? Are there any limitations? Does the discussion logically lead to your conclusion?
Do not: Make statements that go beyond what the results can support Suddenly introduce new terms or ideas
32
33
Reference Management Software helps
Many journals are helpful in formatting the journal reference style for you (e.g. Elsevier’s Your Paper Your Way service).
If the publisher is not offering this service it is your responsibility to format references correctly!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_reference_management_software
34
Cover Letter
Your chance to speak to the editor directly
Submitted along with your manuscript
Mention what would make your manuscript special to the journal
Note special requirements (suggest reviewers, conflicts of interest)
Final approval from all
authors
Explanation of
importance of research
Suggested reviewers
35
Suggest potential reviewers
Your suggestions will help the Editor to move your manuscript to the review stage more efficiently.
You can easily find potential reviewers and their contact details from articles in your specific subject area (e.g., your references).
The reviewers should represent at least two regions of the world. And they should not be
your supervisor or close friends.
Be prepared to suggest 3-6 potential reviewers, based on the Guide to Authors.
36
Submit a
paper
Basic requirements met?
REJECT
Assign
reviewers
Collect reviewers’
recommendations
Make a
decisionRevise the
paper
[Reject]
[Revision required]
[Accept]
[Yes]
[No]Review and give
recommendation
START
ACCEPT
Author Editor Reviewer
The Peer Review Process – not a black hole!
Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.
http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf
37
Why?
The peer-review system is grossly overloaded and editors wish to use reviewers only for those papers with a good probability of acceptance.
It is a disservice to ask reviewers to spend time on work that has clear and evident deficiencies.
Initial Editorial Review or Desk Reject
Many journals use a system of initial editorial review. Editors may reject a manuscript without sending it out for review.
38
First Decision: “Accepted” or “Rejected”
Accepted Very rare, but it happens
Congratulations! Cake for the department
Now wait for page proofs and then for your article to be online and in print
Rejected Probability 40-90% ...
Do not despair It happens to everybody
Try to understand WHY Consider reviewers’ advice
Be self-critical
If you submit to another journal, begin as if it were a new manuscript
Take advantage of the reviewers’ comments and revise accordingly
They may review your manuscript for the next journal too!
Read the Guide for Authors of the new journal, again and again.
39
First Decision: “Major” or “Minor” Revision
Major revision
The manuscript may finally be published in the journal
Significant deficiencies must be corrected before
acceptance
Usually involves (significant) textual modifications and/or
additional experiments
Minor revision
Basically, the manuscript is worth being published
Some elements in the manuscript must be clarified,
restructured, shortened (often) or expanded (rarely)
Textual adaptations
“Minor revision” does NOT guarantee acceptance after
revision, but often it is accepted if all points are addressed!
40
Manuscript Revision
Prepare a detailed Response Letter Copy-paste each reviewer comment, and type your response below it
State specifically which changes you have made to the manuscript
Include page/line numbers
No general statements like “Comment accepted, and Discussion changed
accordingly.”
Provide a scientific response to comments to accept, .....
..... or a convincing, solid and polite rebuttal when you feel the reviewer was
wrong.
Write in such a manner, that your response can be forwarded to the reviewer
without prior editing
Do not do yourself a disfavour, but cherish your work You spent weeks and months in the lab or the library to do the research
It took you weeks to write the manuscript.........
.....Why then run the risk of avoidable rejection
by not taking manuscript revision seriously?
41 41
Increasing the likelihood of acceptance
All these various steps are not difficult.
You have to be consistent.
You have to check and recheck before submitting.
Make sure you tell a logical, clear, story about your findings.
Especially, take note of referees’ comments. They improve your
paper.
This should increase the likelihood of your paper being
accepted, and being in the 30% (accepted) not the 70%
(rejected) group!
42
Your Paper is Published – What now?
Your paper becomes visible online in the journal website, such as ScienceDirect, Springer Link etc. and in databases as SCOPUS, PubMed, etc.
There are many things you can do to draw attention to your great research just online…
Think Social Media!
42
43
Publishing as a springboard in science
How can scientists be more visible? How can publishers help? What do publishers do?
44
Publishing as a springboard in science
Journals: Editors linked to journals benefit the journal, and benefit themselves by extra exposure and status. The same applies to editorial board members, and many list their position as board member on their CV, or web page listing their achievements. People added to board are either active referees, or high-profile researchers. So the sooner you start being a reviewer the better for your career. But how?
45 45
Publishing as a springboard in science
Scientists who are not editors or editorial board members? Publishing high quality original research papers is always the best way to become known and respected, but there are other ways too. Publishing quality reviews usually attracts high downloads and citations – chance to highlight specific themes or specific papers, thus influencing direction of research field.
46
Review articles vs Original Articles
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Review Article Review Article Review Article
Average cites per paper
Author 2 Author 3
47
Publishing as a springboard in science
Impact: Become a Guest Editor for a Thematic Special Issue for a journal. Guest Editor selects authors important to the subject area, and writes an editorial for the special issue. Chance to ‘steer’ a field. The Special Issue is often referred to by the Guest Editor’s name - helps exposure and recognition. Special Issues are often highly downloaded and cited - good for authors, and good for the guest editor too.
48
Downloads of Special Issue editorials
Journal VolumeIssue Article Name Author(s) Downloads
Methods 50 4 The ongoing evolution of qPCR Pfaffl, M.W. 3,618
FEBS Letters 584 7 Autophagy Mizushima, N. 2,594
FEBS Letters 585 13 Epigenetics Issa, J.P.; Just, W. 1,948
FEBS Letters 584 17
Telomere biology and DNA repair: Enemies with
benefits Lange, T.d. 1,809
FEBS Letters 586 14 TGF-@b signaling in development and disease Massague, J. 1,687
FEBS Letters 585 10 Circadian rhythms Merrow, M.; Brunner, M. 1,292
Methods 58 3
3C-based technologies to study the shape of the
genome de Laat, W.; Dekker, J. 1,081
Methods 61 2
Distinguishing between apoptosis, necrosis,
necroptosis and other cell death modalities Martin, S.J.; Henry, C.M. 1,031
FEBS Letters 585 18
The ubiquitin clan: A protein family essential for
life Wolf, D.H. 1,023
Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular & Integrative Physiology158 3
The challenge of measuring energy
expenditure: Current field and laboratory
methods Halsey, L.G. 971
Methods 52 3 A-Z of methylome analysis Beck, S. 956
Methods 54 2
RNA Nanotechnology: Methods for synthesis,
conjugation, assembly and application of RNA
nanoparticles Guo, P. 828
Methods 55 4 A roadmap to membrane protein structures Stevens, R.C. 806
Methods 52 1 Protein folding Gruebele, M. 729
ABB 500 1
Heme peroxidase biochemistry - Facts and
perspectives Obinger, C. 589
ABB 525 2 Catalases and hydrogen peroxide metabolism Obinger, C. 584
ABB 503 1
The central role of the skeleton in chronic
diseases Teti, A.; Eastell, R. 570
October 2013 data
49
Citations of Special Issues vs Regular Issues
Fitzpatrick/Trends in Enzymology (S.Sec.)
Guengerich/P450 Catalysis and Mechanisms
Mukhtar/Biochem and Biophys of the Skin
Walsh/Protein Kinases
Grant/Allosteric Regulation
DeLuca/Vitamin D
Klotz/Cell-Cell Communication
Obinger/Catalysis and H2O2
Rüker/Antibody Engineering
Santes-Buelga/ Polyphenols and Health
0.000
2.000
4.000
6.000
8.000
10.000
12.000
14.000
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1-2
1 2 1 2 1-2
1-2
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1-2
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528
2011 2012
Total
Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics
October 2013 data
50
Publishing as a springboard in science
Refereeing/reviewing: Active referees often added to editorial board. Not that visible until then, except for annual list of referees published in many journals. Referee acknowledgment programme just starting.
51
Publishing as a springboard in science
Author clinic: As an experienced author, younger researchers and post docs need your experience to help them write better papers. With more published papers, the university authorities are grateful, and your help is often recognized. It feels good too!
52
What a Publisher does (1):
Solicit and manage submissions to journals.
Manage Peer review process.
Edit and prepare papers.
Publish and disseminate online and in print.
Develop innovations to help author/reader e.g. Apps.
Archive journal articles ‘forever’.
Promote and market content.
Support young scholars with grants/awards.
53
What a Publisher does (2):
Bibliometric analysis to help journals change to
reflect their field better.
Plagiarism control and other publishing ethics issues.
Recruitment and training of journal editors.
Support societies and associations by attending meetings
and conferences.
Produce training materials/courses/workshops to help
authors and referees.
54
Launching and Developing journals
3% more scientists every year
More than 3% more papers every year
Traditional fields splinter and niche fields develop
Many Funding bodies insist on Open Access publishing
So new journals are needed regularly!
And existing journals need to evolve to match needs of researchers
Examples:
OA Launch Evolution
55
Editor/Publisher relationship
The Scientific Editor is essential for managing peer-review and scientific
quality.
Publisher and colleagues do all the back-office tasks for the Editor around the
journal.
The Publishing House takes care of marketing, subscriptions, typesetting,
online content, analysis, permanent archiving of papers, etc.
Editor and Publisher together are a symbiotic team managing the quality,
focus, and strategy of the journal so that its scientific content best reflects the
community who publish in, and read it.
56
Author Responsibilities
As authors we have lots of rights and privileges, but also we have the responsibility to be ethical.
57
Plagiarism Detection Tools
Elsevier is participating in 2 plagiarism detection schemes:
TurnItIn (aimed at universities) iThenticate (aimed at publishers and corporations)
Manuscripts are automatically checked against a database
of 30+ million peer reviewed articles which have been
donated by 200+ publishers, including Elsevier.
More traditional approach also happens: Editors and reviewers Your colleagues Readers "Other“ whistleblowers
“The walls have ears", it seems ...
58
58
Publication ethics – Self-plagiarism
Same colour
left and right
=
Same text
2003 2004
59 59
An article in which the authors committed plagiarism: it will not be
removed from ScienceDirect ever. Everybody who downloads it will
see the reason for the retraction…
60
Figure Manipulation – some things are allowed
61
Figure Manipulation Example - Different authors and reported experiments
Am J Pathol, 2001 Life Sci, 2004 Images worked on, added to,
rotated 180°, to become:
Rotated 180o
Zoomed out ?!
| 62
| 63
Author Services: CiteAlert. New. Free. Unique. Automated service to notify authors when their articles are cited in Elsevier-published journals. For more info and an example please visit: www.elsevier.com/locate/citealert Audioslides. A new tool for authors to put their article in the spotlight. See www.elsevier.com/about/content-innovation/audioslides-author-presentations-for-journal-articles Article Usage Reports. Know and advance your paper’s impact. See http://www.elsevier.com/connect/article-usage-reports-enable-authors-to-track-downloads-and-views
64
Questions?
Or for questions later, please
contact [email protected]
This set of slides as a PDF will be available through the conference.
There is full permission granted to distribute them as long as they
are not edited.
Top Related